ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Some studies have shown that rhabdosphincter reconstruction provides an earlier return to continence after radical prostatectomy. We aim to study the impact of this procedure in urinary continence along with comparing two specific surgical techniques for posterior reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a group of patients who were submitted to LRP with No Rhabdosphincter Reconstruction (NRR) and another group with Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter (PRR). The latter was further divided into two groups: "Rocco type stitch" group and "Bollens type stitch" group. We used three questionnaires (IIEF-5, ICIQ-SF and IPSS) to assess urinary continence and erectile function 90 days after surgery. RESULTS: Patients of PRR group had a better full continence rate than patients of NRR group at 90 days (96.6% vs 33.3%, p < 0.001). Concerning urinary incontinence (p = 0.116), lower urinary tract symptoms (p = 0.543) and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.738), our results suggested that there were no differences between the techniques studied. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter has significant benefits for urinary continence recovery on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. No differences were observed in continence recovery between the two techniques analyzed. Additionally, reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter appears to be a safe procedure with no increased risk of postoperative complications.
Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Prostatic Neoplasms , Fascia , Humans , Ligaments , Male , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Recovery of Function , Urethra/surgeryABSTRACT
To the Editor, Radical Prostatectomy (RP) is one of the preferred treatments for localized prostatic cancer and although surgical complications have been reduced over the years, urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction are still common and significantly impact the patient's life. Therefore, adequate patient education and counselling before RP is essential. Informed Consent (IC) is a crucial element of doctor-patient interaction, and it must ensure that patients receive and understand all the information regarding their diseases and treatments. Implicit in providing IC is assessing the patient's understanding, since accessible communication enables them to make informed decisions consciously and autonomously about their health status [...].